Source document: https://docs-lawep.s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/1698941639500.pdf (Zambia)
REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON LANDS, ENVIRONMENT AND TOURISM ON THE AUDITOR GENERAL’S REPORT ON THE MANAGEMENT OF WIDLIFE IN ZAMBIA FOR THE FOURTH SESSION OF THE ELEVENTH NATIONAL ASSEMBLY APPOINTED ON 25TH SEPTEMBER, 2014 Consisting of: Mr R K Chitotela, MP (Chairperson); Mr R Muntanga, MP; Ms M Miti, MP; Mr R Mwewa, MP; Dr S Musokotwane, MP; Mr H S Chansa, MP; Mr O Mulomba, MP; and Mr K Chipungu, MP.
The Honourable Mr Speaker, National Assembly, Parliament Buildings, LUSAKA Sir, Your Committee has the honour to present its Report on the Report of the Auditor General on the Management of Wildlife in Zambia for the Fourth Session of the Eleventh National Assembly.

Functions of the Committee 2.


In addition to any other duties placed upon it by the Honourable Mr Speaker or any Standing Order or any other order of the Assembly, the duties of the Committee on Lands, Environment and Tourism are as follows: i. ii.
to study, report and make appropriate recommendations to the Government through the House on the mandate, management and operations of the Government ministries, departments and/or agencies under their portfolio; to carry out detailed scrutiny of certain activities being undertaken by the Government ministries, departments and/or agencies under their portfolio and make appropriate recommendations to the House for ultimate consideration by the Government; iii.
to make, if considered, necessary recommendations to the Government on the need to review certain policies and/or certain existing legislation; and iv.

to consider any Bills that may be referred to it by the House.

Meetings of the Committee Your Committee held seven meetings to consider the Auditor General’s Report on the 3.

Management of Wildlife in Zambia.

Procedure adopted by the Committee 4.


During the course of its deliberations, your Committees studied the Report of the Auditor General on the Management of Wildlife in Zambia.
To further assist your Committee appreciate the subject matter, it invited the following to provide both written and oral submissions: (i) (ii) Community Based Natural Resources Management Forum; Zambia Tourism Board; 1 Zambia Revenue Authority; Sable Safaris; African Parks; (iii) (iv) (v) (vi) Ministry of Lands, Natural Resources and Environmental Protection; and (vii) Ministry of Tourism and Arts.

AUDIT REPORT BACKGROUND 5.


The Office of the Auditor General pursuant to its mandate as provided for under, inter alia, Article 121(2) of the Constitution of Zambia, the Public Audit Act, the Public Finance Act submitted a performance audit report on the Management of Wildlife.
The performance audit was carried out to assess the effectiveness with which the Zambia Wildlife Authority (ZAWA) conducted its activities to maintain and sustain bio-diversity, reverse the decline in wildlife, improve livelihoods of the communities in Game Management Areas as well as increase revenue generation.

The Zambia Wildlife Authority (ZAWA) was established in 1998 under the Zambia Wildlife Act, No.

12 of 1998.
12 of 1998.

Prior to the establishment of the Authority, management of wildlife was under the Department of National Parks and Wildlife Service (NPWS) in the Ministry of Tourism.

According to the Act and ZAWA’s Strategic Plan (2008–2012), ZAWA was to achieve excellence in wildlife estate management by developing innovative approaches and partnership based on best practice.
In addition, ZAWA was to contribute to the preservation of the biological and social economic value of Zambia’s natural heritage, ecosystems and biodiversity for future generations by the careful conservation of Zambia’s present wildlife resources.

The following are ZAWA’s specific policy objectives as stated in the Act: i. ii.

iii.

iv.
iii.

iv.

to improve the quality of life among communities in wildlife estates and maintenance of sustainable biodiversity in national parks and game management areas; to reverse the decline in wildlife resources; to improve wildlife resource management to a level which will secure a sustainable flow of benefits from resources; and to considerably improve the wildlife resource base investment in co-operation with the private sector and local communities.
ZAWA manages a total of twenty (20) National Parks and thirty-six (36) Game Management Areas (GMAs).

A total of seventy-four (74) Community Resource Boards (CRBs) had so far been established within the proximity of the National Parks.

GMAs were established principally to serve as buffer zones around the National Parks and it was in these areas were the Community Based Natural Resource Management Programmes were established with the view to co-manage the wildlife resources.
Thus, GMAs are not only important reservoirs of the wildlife resources but also form a cornerstone in the implementation of the various strategies in wildlife management.

In return for their participation in wildlife management, communities through their respective CRBs received a share of revenues that accrued from wildlife utilisation.
In June 2002, the communities and 2 ZAWA agreed that communities would receive 45% while the Chiefs who were Patrons would receive 5% from revenues generated from wildlife utilisation.
Sources of Funds During the years 2008, 2009, and 2010, ZAWA collected a total amount of K42,865,000,000, K53,359,000,000 and K51,444,000,000 respectively as revenue through the issuance of hunting licences, park entry fees, lease fees from various Area Management Units (AMU); and received total amounts of K29,082,419,116, K12,615,413,188 and K16,131,754,605 for the years 2008, 2009 and 2010 respectively from the Government and cooperating partners.
The objective of the audit was to assess whether the Zambia Wildlife Authority (ZAWA) was managing wildlife effectively.

The audit was conducted on ZAWA and the area of assessment was on the decline of wildlife, maintenance of bio diversity, increases in revenue generation and improvement in the livelihoods of communities living in the Game Management Areas (GMA).
The audit covered nine (9) National Parks, fourteen (14) Community Resource Boards (CRB), various tour operators and projects operating in the parks and GMAs.

Auditor General’s Findings and Recommendations on the Management of Wildlife in Zambia 6.

The audit was based on document review, observations, inquiries and physical inspections.
In particular, the following were observed: a. animal surveys were not regularly done and the Authority had no appropriate and adequate equipment and other resources for conducting proper animal surveys; b. there was no information regarding levels of sustainability and the birth/outtake ratio per species provided for audit scrutiny; as a result, the regional offices could not effectively carry out monitoring activities as they lacked documentation regarding animal and bird quotas; c. various activities such as mining and settlements within the national parks and GMAs resulted in undesirable activities such as poaching, illegal farming, pollution, industrial noise, unauthorised bush fires, and the introduction of exotic plants and domestic animals; these factors caused depletion of wildlife and loss of the eco system; d. a number of exploration/mining activities were being conducted without proof of them being legal, especially in Kafue and Lukusuzi National Parks; and disused mines were not being rehabilitated resulting in destruction of the eco system; e. ZAWA failed to provide proof of Environmental Impact Assessments having been conducted by tour operators thereby posing a risk of carrying out undesirable activities that may contribute to loss of bio diversity; f. ZAWA and the CRBs visited did not provid proof of Area Management Plans having been prepared, as a result the activities of the Boards such as plans to prevent loss of biodiversity, encroachment and community development activities could not be accessed; and g. ZAWA had failed to increase the revenue as it only managed to raise a total of K53.4 billion in 2009 and K51.4 billion in 2010 as compared to the targeted revenue of K40 billion in 2009 and K100 billion by the year 2010 according to the Strategic Plan for the year 2008–2012.
3 In this regard, the Auditor General made the recommendations set out below.

a. Livelihood of the communities in Game Management Areas ZAWA should develop and implement a robust public awareness programme for the local people in GMAs and the general public at large.

b.

High threats and pressure on biodiversity and wildlife i.
An updated wildlife inventory was essential for providing the most reliable data for setting hunting quota hence ZAWA should update information on wildlife resources, socio-economy and land-use for planning and sustainable management of the wildlife resources.

ii.

ZAWA should develop a strategy aimed at addressing the problem of illegal activities in protected areas which was holistic to include a wide range of policy, legal, institutional and technical options.

iii.
iii.

ZAWA should ensure that EIA reports were prepared and approved before operators proceed with developments.

iv.

ZAWA should develop park management plans in areas where these were not in place in order to strengthen the sustainable management of wildlife.

Submission by Ministry of Tourism and Arts The Ministry of Tourism and Arts submitted that efficient and effective management of wildlife 7. was considered key to the development of the tourism sector in Zambia.
In order to achieve this, the Government of the Republic of Zambia established the Zambia Wildlife Authority under the Wildlife Act, No.

12 of 1998.

One of the objectives was to improve the quality of life among communities in wildlife estates and maintenance of sustainable biodiversity in national parks and game management areas.

However, this objective had not been fully achieved due to various reasons including the ones highlighted in the Auditor General's Report.
The Ministry submitted as outlined below.

Animal surveys were not regularly done and that the Authority had no appropriate and a. adequate equipment and other resources for conducting proper animal surveys Although ZAWA did not have its own equipment to carry out aerial surveys, it conducted regular surveys in key ecosystems like Kafue and Luangwa as these were the areas where viable hunting took place.
ZAWA had been working with Cooperating Partners and the Government in addition to its own resources to conduct these surveys.

As a way forward, ZAWA had proposed to procure at least two aircrafts in its five years Business Plan, 2014 to 2018.

There was no information regarding levels of sustainability and the birth /outtake ratio per b. species provided for audit scrutiny.
As a result, the regional offices could not effectively carry out monitoring activities as they lacked documentation regarding animal and bird quotas Population data from aerial surveys was always available and the birth/outtake ratio was derived from there by looking at the increase or decrease in animal population of each species.

In order to promote sustainable animal offtake, a conservative 2% of the estimated animal population was given out as a quota.
4 c. Various activities such as mining and settlements within the national parks and GMAs resulted in undesirable activities such as poaching, farming, pollution, industrial noise, bush fires, introduction of exotic plants and domestic animals.

These factors cause depletion of wildlife and loss of the eco system Mining in the GMAs and National Parks had been an issue of concern to ZAWA.
However, in most of the GMAs, General Management Plans (GMP) had been developed to guide activities that included mining and encroachment.

The Authority had been engaging with the Ministry of Mines, Energy and Water Development to ensure that ZAWA was consulted before any mining licenses were issued.

A number of explorations were being conducted without proof of them being legal d. especially in Kafue and Lukusuzi National Parks.
In addition, disused mines were not being rehabilitated resulting in destruction of eco systems No mining was allowed without ZAWA giving consent through an EPB/EIA approved through ZEMA.

The ones without permits or ZAWA escorts at the site are illegal miners.

However, monitoring had been difficult due to inadequate manpower by the Ministry of Mines, Energy and Water Development and ZEMA.
Recently, efforts had been made to form a joint monitoring committee to scrutinise all applications before a permit was given.

In addition, ZAWA was putting up terms and conditions if and when mining was allowed in the Protected Areas.
e. ZAWA failed to provide proof of EIA having been conducted by tour operators thereby posing risk of carrying out undesirable activities that may contribute to loss of biodiversity Environmental Impact Assessments (ElAs) were conducted for large scale developments whereas Safari Camps just needed an Environment Project Brief (EPB).

This was a requirement even before a Tourism Concession Agreement (TCA) was signed.
Most of the documents were kept by the operators at their offices in Lusaka and not in the field.

However, some camps were established before the ZEMA Act, hence failure to provide EIAs or EPBs.
f. ZAWA and Community Resource Boards visited did not provide proof of Area Management Development Plans as a result the activities of the Boards such as plans to prevent loss of biodiversity, encroachment and community development activities could not be accessed During the audit, most of the areas had draft GMPs which had since been approved by the Board and ready for implementation.

About 19 GMPs, 4 for National Parks and 15 for GMAs, had been approved.
The GMPs would guide developmental activities such as agriculture, mining and settlements.

g. ZAWA had failed to increase the revenue as it only managed to raise a total of K53.4 billion in 2009 and K51.4 billion in 2010 as compared to the targeted revenue of K40 billion in 2009 and K100 billion by the year 2010 according to the strategic plan for the 2008 - 2012 It had been difficult for ZAWA to raise revenue because of low funding from the Government and cooperating partners.
When ZAWA was transformed from the National Parks and Wildlife Service (NPWS) with European Union funding, the assumption was that it would receive 12 million Euros annually until sustainability was achieved.

The funding was for upgrading infrastructure leading to and within the Protected Areas (PA).

They would have increased the tourism season and attracted investments into the parks and GMAs.

However, the EU pulled out and the funding was not availed.

The Government did little to fill the void.


ZAWA had developed a business plan with justifications as to why Government must support it in various areas to enable the attraction of the private sector.

5 Where ZAWA had funding by the Cooperating Partners there had been tremendous success in terms of revenue generation, like the South Luangwa National Park which had become self-sustaining.

This was after more than 25 years of consistent funding.
Kafue National Park was in line to follow the South Luangwa on the sustainability path after receiving funding from Norway and the World Bank for seven years.

With regard to the recommendations, the Ministry responded as set out below.

a. Livelihood of the communities in Game Management Areas ZAWA should develop and implement a robust public awareness programme for the local people in GMAs and the general public at large.

Response The recommendation was acknowledged.


In order to enhance public awareness and enhance collaboration with communities and their Royal Highnesses, ZAWA had introduced a subcommittee of the Board to specifically deal with matters of community livelihoods in Game Management Areas.
In addition, Community Liaison Officers had been employed in most management units to spearhead public awareness activities through Community Resource Boards (CRBs) and Village Action Groups (VAGs) for the benefit of conserving wildlife and maintaining the ecological balance in the GMAs.

Further, strategies such as opening of a ZAWA face book account, use of electronic and print media were being employed to improve public awareness.

b.

High threats and pressure on biodiversity and wildlife i.
An updated wildlife inventory was essential for providing the most reliable data for setting hunting quotas, hence ZAWA should update information on wildlife resources, socio-economy and land use planning for sustainable management of the wildlife resources.

Response ZAWA conducted aerial surveys every two years when resources permitted.
In the year 2013, with funding support from World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF), The Nature Conservancy (TNC) and the Government, a country wide aerial survey was conducted to update the wildlife inventory which would guide policy on sustainable harvest of wildlife.

As a result of the aerial survey report, the Honourable Minister of Tourism announced and lifted the suspension on hunting in August, 2014 and maintained the ban on hunting of cats.

ii.
ii.

ZAWA should develop a strategy aimed at addressing the problem of illegal activities in protected areas which was holistic to include a wide range of policy, institutional and technical options.

Responses Activities such as settlements, agriculture and other socio-economic activities were regulated through GMPs.

During the audit, most Protected Areas had draft GMPs which had since been approved by the Board and were ready for implementation.
About 19 GMPs, 4 for National Parks and 15 for GMAs, had been approved.

The GMPs would guide developmental activities such as agriculture, mining and settlements where applicable in Protected Areas.

In addition, the Authority intended to continue strengthening collaboration with other Sector Agencies such as the Forestry Department, ZEMA, Ministry of Mines, Energy and Water Development, Ministry of Lands, Natural Resources and Environmental Protection and the communities living in GMAs through CRBs.
The problem of illegal 6 activities such as logging, encroachments and mining could only be addressed with the collaboration of other key stakeholders.

iii.

ZAWA should ensure that Development Agreement (DA) reports were prepared and approved before operators proceeded with developments.

Response Environmental Impact Assessments (ElAs) were conducted for large scale developments whereas Safari Camps just need an Environment Project Brief (EPB).
This was a standard requirement before a Tourism Concession Agreement (TCA) was signed.

Most of the documents were kept by the operators at their offices in Lusaka and were not readily available in the field.

However, some camps were established before the ZEMA Act, hence failure by some Tour Operators to provide ElAs or EPBs.

iv.

ZAWA should develop park management plans in areas where these were not in place in order to strengthen the sustainable management of wildlife.
Response Activities such as settlements, agriculture and other socio-economic activities were regulated through GMPs.

During the audit, most Protected Areas had draft GMPs which had since been approved by the Board and ready for implementation.

About 19 GMPs, 4 for National Parks and 15 for GMAs, had been approved.

The Authority would ensure that GMPs were developed for all areas which did not have in order to prevent and arrest illegal activities such as encroachments and poaching.
Notwithstanding budgetary constraints, ZAWA had provided some funds in the 2015 Budget to develop GMPs in addition to solicit for support from private partners such as Frankfurt Zoological Society, African Parks, WWF and Kasanka Trust Limited.
Other Audit Findings a. Irregular cash advance payments to Community Resource Boards (CRB)-Game Management Areas (GMAs) Within the structure of ZAWA, there was a section on GMAs whose overall objective was to provide a link between ZAWA and the Local Communities in wildlife management matters.

Local Communities were expected to utilise the public funds on agreed socio-economic projects such as schools, health centres, farming and feeder roads, among others.
The guidelines on the disbursement of funds required that the funds be transferred through the CRBs bank accounts opened for the purpose.

It was, however, observed that a sum of K 1,368,119,603 was irregularly disbursed between 2008 and 2011 to twenty seven (27) CRBs as advance payments against the share of the community through individuals.
Response The Honourable Minister of Tourism and Arts had created a Committee of the Authority to tackle all matters pertaining to community and wildlife resources and that guidelines on disbursement of funds to CRBs through banks accounts would be introduced.

All CRBs countrywide had since been dissolved to pave way for fresh elections.
With the support of NGOs and other Private Partners, ZAWA had facilitated the election of new CRB members who would be trained in financial management and general administration of CRBs.

The Authority would ensure that 7 once disbursement of funds to CRBs resumed, funds were channeled to respective CRB bank accounts.

b.
b.

Lack of documentation on hunting quotas Contrary to the provisions of the Act which required ZAWA to provide for the licensing of quotas and a documented transparent hunting quota system, there was no evidence regarding the levels of sustainability and the birth and outtake ratio per species.

It was, therefore, difficult to assess how the monitoring of hunting activities to help reduce the decline in wildlife population was done.
Response ZAWA had been conducting aerial surveys in key hunting areas of the Luangwa and Kafue ecosystems.

The results gave the recruitment levels and a basis for setting up of a quota.

This had always been a conservative 2% of the total population.

A countrywide wildlife population survey was conducted in 2013 whose results indicated that the wildlife populations were still stable to allow for sustainable harvest.

The Honourable Minister had since lifted the suspension on hunting except on cats.
c. Inadequate numbers of scouts in GMAs According to the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), on average a protected areas scout ratio should be one (1) scout per 50 km².

However, inquiries and records obtained at ZAWA revealed that the protected area scout ratio varied from 70km² to 3,173 km² per scout.

In some instances GMAs had no scouts at all.

As a result of the inadequate numbers of scouts manning the GMAs, the monitoring of illegal activities in these areas was not effective.
Response ZAWA management had undertaken to establish new area management units within the protected area system and to recruit new manpower.

ZAWA management had since created about 24 management clusters across the protected area system in order to effectively conduct law enforcement activities.
Further, a Business Plan had since been developed and submitted along with a Cabinet Memorandum in which a phased manpower recruitment plan had been proposed to reach a target of 3,500 wildlife police officers by the year 2018. d. Mining activities in the National Parks Zambia Wildlife Act allowed for granting of mining rights in National Parks and GMAs as long as an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) which should take into account the need to conserve and protect bio-diversity was carried out and approved by ZEMA.
Licenses should also be issued regarding mining activities in the National Parks.

However, there were nine (9) mines namely;Fwayalwaya, KapiliNkesa, Jeff, Shell, Chipembele, Mwase Phiri, Kamusiya and Lupita in Lukusuzi National Park and EasiFuels Mine in Kafue National Park that were carrying out mining activities without mining licenses.

The mining activities had over the past years adversely affected the animal population and tourism activities in the national parks.
For instance, Lukusuzi National park had been heavily impacted by precious and semi-precious stone mining.

8 Response Mining in the GMAs and National Parks had been an issue of concern to ZAWA.

However, in most of the GMAs, General Management Plans (GMP) had been developed to guide activities that included mining and encroachment.

The Authority had been engaging the Ministry of Mines to ensure that ZAWA was consulted before any mining licenses were issued.
Easifuel at Hippo mine had been granted a prospecting license by the Ministry of Mines, Energy and Water Development which they abused by mining without a permit.

ZAWA reported the matter to the Ministry of Mines, Energy and Water Development who then cancelled the prospecting license and ZAWA evicted them from the area.

ZAWA equally sued them for destroying the area.


To avoid further environmental and habitat degradation due to mining activities, ZAWA was empowered by the Wildlife Act of 1998 to prescribe terms and conditions under which mining activities may be allowed in the National Parks.
e. Failure to undertake an Environmental Impact Assessment Contrary to the Environmental Protection and Pollution Control Act (EPPCA) 1997, ZAWA issued twenty one (21) licences to tourist operators without approved environmental impact Assessments from the Zambia Environmental Management Agency.

Response Environmental Impact Assessments (ElAs) were conducted for large scale developments whereas Safari Camps just required an Environment Project Brief (EPB).
This was a standard requirement before a Tourism Concession Agreement (TCA) was signed.

Most of the documents were kept by the operators at their offices in Lusaka and were not readily available in the field.

However, some camps were established before the ZEMA Act, hence failure by some Tour Operators to provide ElAs or EPBs.

f. Failure to prepare and implement General Management Plans Contrary to the ZAWA Act, nine (9) National Parks and various CRBs did not have General Management Plans.
In this regard, it was not possible to ascertain the activities of the boards such as plans to prevent loss of biodiversity, encroachment and community development activities, among others.

Response Activities such as settlements, agriculture and other socioeconomic activities were regulated through GMPs.

During the audit, most Protected Areas had draft GMPs which had since been approved by the Board and were ready for implementation.
About 19 GMPs, 4 for National Parks and 15 for GMAs, had since been approved.

The Authority would ensure that GMPs were developed for all areas which did not have in order to prevent and arrest illegal activities such as encroachments and poaching.

Notwithstanding budgetary constraints, ZAWA had provided some funds in the 2015 Budget to develop GMPs in addition to solicit for support from private partners such as Frankfurt Zoological Society, African Parks, WWF and Kasanka Trust Limited.
g. Tour operators with valid TCAs but not operating Out of a total of thirty (30) tour operators in the Kafue National Park, fifteen (15) operators with valid concession agreements signed between 2003 and 2008 were not operating and had not honoured their obligations to pay fixed charges.

However, as of 31st December, 2013, ZAWA had not taken any action against the operators.

9 Response ZAWA had taken action and put in stringent measures to correct this situation.
ZAWA has requested all tour operators who wished to renew (TCAs) with the Authority to settle all outstanding accounts/trade receivables in full prior to renewal of TCAs.

Secondly, ZAWA has cancelled erring Tourism Concession Agreements and was in the course of instituting legal action to recover the outstanding receivables.
Thirdly, ZAWA had included a clause in the Tourism Concession Agreements, to be backed by issuance of a Statutory Instrument (SI) by the Honourable Minister of Tourism and Arts, to restrain actions that would result in unnecessary accrual of accounts receivables on the part of the Authority in future.

Further, action was underway to re-advertise the tourism sites and engage more serious investors so that ZAWA got the value for money from the investment opportunities.
Committee’s Observations and Recommendations 8.

Your Committee made the observations as set out below.

Performance of the Zambia Wildlife Authority The Government’s intention in creating statutory bodied such as the Zambia wildlife Authority was that such bodies should be self-sustaining.

Your Committee, notes, with dismay, that the Zambia Wildlife Authority is unable to sustain itself financially.
Additionally, the Zambia Wildlife Authority has performed below expectation due to: (i) (ii) in part, limited human resource to cover the expansive land mass that makes up Zambia’s protected areas.

lack of equipment to do aerial animal surveys; currently the Authority depends on hired equipment to do these surveys.
Inter-sector Links and Coordination There is a clear lack of coordination between the Ministries and their respective departments and agencies responsible for Lands, Environment, Tourism and Mining.

Though the law has provided for the various requirements that developers in protected areas need to meet before they can operate in such areas, the lack of inter-ministerial coordination has resulted in these requirements not being followed.
This is compounded by the fact that different pieces of legislation such as the Zambia Wildlife Act, the Mines and Minerals Development, the Environmental Management Act are currently not working harmoniously.

Protected Areas ZAWA manages a total of twenty (20) National Parks and thirty-six (36) Game Management Areas (GMAs) which cover an area of 30% of Zambia’s total land mass.

However, your Committee notes that some of these areas are protected on paper only as they do not have any wildlife.
Your Committee, therefore, recommends as set out below.

(i) In order to improve the performance of the Zambia Wildlife Authority, the Government should improve the staffing for the Authority.

Additionally private sector participation which 10 is well guided should be encouraged for some areas, especially for those that require restocking and cannot be efficiently managed by ZAWA.

(ii) The Government should procure equipment for conducting aerial animal surveys for ZAWA.
(iii) (iv) (v) (vi) An inter-ministerial committee of experts should be established to increase coordination among the Ministries of Lands, Natural Resources and Environmental Protection; Tourism and Arts and Mines, Energy and Water Development to enhance coordination in the various sectors.

If the Zambia Wildlife Authority as a statutory body is unable to sustain its own operations, then the Government should consider making it into a department of the Ministry of Tourism and Arts.
The Government should review the various pieces of legislation that touch on the environment, tourism, and mining with a view to harmonising them.

Prior to the issuance of any licence in a protected area, all the legal requirements should be satisfied.

CONCLUSION 9.

Your Committee wishes to express its gratitude to you, Mr Speaker, and to the Clerk of the National Assembly for the support rendered to it during the year.
Your Committee is also indebted to all the witnesses who appeared before it for their co-operation in providing the necessary memoranda and briefs.

Your Committee is hopeful that the observations and recommendations contained in this report will go a long way in improving the wildlife sector in Zambia.
R K Chitotela, MP CHAIRPERSON December 2014 LUSAKA 11 APPENDIX I List of Officials Mr S C Kawimbe, Principal Clerk of Committees Ms M K Sampa, Deputy Principal Clerk of Committees Mr F Nabulyato, Committee Clerk (FC) Mr M F Kateshi, Committee Clerk (SC) Ms S Sianga, Assistant Committee Clerk Ms C Musonda, Assistant Committee Clerk Mrs D Mukwanka, Assistant Committee Clerk Mrs T C M Kasonde, Assistant Committee Clerk Ms K Chisenga, Typist Mr R Mumba, Committee Assistant 12